Comments by "Anony Mousse" (@anon_y_mousse) on "This Linux Desktop Debate Will Never Be Resolved" video.

  1. So do I. It's super easy and very error free, also right click for resizing is beautiful, even when an app is maximized.
    2
  2. I suppose you might have a point. I can use a shortcut to do most things with an app, close it, keep it on top, KDE even allows me to bind min/max buttons. The one thing that would prevent me from dropping it entirely is the title text. If you've got a solution for that which doesn't involve the task bar, which I auto-hide, then you'd have yourself a deal.
    1
  3.  @dengan699  The thought occurs to me, if we can auto-hide a task bar, why can't we auto-hide a title bar. I have my task bar at the bottom, and the title bar at the top, so for me it'd make sense that if hovering the mouse towards the top it would pop down. What do you think?
    1
  4.  @dengan699  What if it worked like the task bar where it pops over stuff instead of moving it?
    1
  5. I think a mix of both would be good. It kind of seems like a good argument for the way Windows has its various subsystems organized. Like the Win32 stuff is split up, with GDI and whatnot. Basically it would make Linux a bit more consistent overall, and if it were an API and designed right from the start, you could swap components on a whim like now, but it would look cleaner. Also, I think I get why people are so insane about tiling on desktops now, because when I need to move an app around, I don't bother clicking the title bar. Used to be that KDE had it setup so you'd hit alt, but now they allow you to customize the key, so I use the WinKey, hold that then click anywhere in the window and drag it wherever I want. Right click and I can resize it and it's super fast and easy.
    1
  6.  @BrodieRobertson  Sure, but in this case it's up to the devs of when to turn it off. Back in the Win98 days I had a Gravis gamepad that made its own window class for the configuration utility and it used a bunch of ovals. It was weird AF, but that's what the devs chose as their aesthetic. I'd actually prefer if devs didn't do that, but it can't really be stopped, even on Macs.
    1
  7. I don't know about now, but with Win98 you interacted with the OS to draw things on screen. You tell it what to draw, it draws it. So when it came to saving processing power if it wasn't on screen its callback function didn't get called and nothing got drawn or processed except that which was in the main loop or any background loops the program started. I would think then that the best method for saving battery power would be SSD. In a way, at least back then, maybe now, Windows is/was a mix of both CSD and SSD.
    1